September 29, 2004

KERRY EDWARDS WHO?:

Dems in Senate get no help from sharing ticket with Kerry (AP, 9/29/04)

Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle hugged President Bush from one end of South Dakota to the other this summer. In his own campaign commercials.

The brief embrace might seem an odd claim on re-election for the man Republicans depict as obstructionist-in-chief for the president's congressional agenda. But Daschle is one of several candidates with a common political problem as Democrats nurse fragile hopes of gaining Senate control this fall.

From the South to South Dakota and Alaska, they are running in areas where Bush is popular — and Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry not so much.

"The congressman is running his own race out here. ... He's not bringing any national people in," said Kristofer Eisenla, spokesman for Democratic Rep. Brad Carson in Oklahoma, where Bush won 60% of the vote in 2000.

"The presidential race is largely separate" from Inez Tenenbaum's campaign in South Carolina, said Adam Kovacevich, a spokesman for the Democratic candidate in another state Kerry has written off.

Of the eight states with the most competitive Senate races, Kerry is seriously contesting only Florida and Colorado, effectively conceding North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Alaska.


The irony of Mr. Kerry being such a drag on the lower portion of the ticket is, of course, that he's only still a Senator today because Bill Clinton carried him over the line in '96. And the real danger for Democrats is that he could prove such a drag--think Jimmy Carter in '80--that seats that seem safe today will be lost on November 2nd--a prime candidate for this effect would be Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas.

Posted by Orrin Judd at September 29, 2004 3:47 PM
Comments

So Kerry gets to play anchor man this time around to finish the job Clinton initiated. Who says the consequences of human actions are not guided by Providence?

Posted by: luciferous at September 29, 2004 4:18 PM

Given Kerry's unpopularity in these states it probably helps the Dem senate candidates to not be associated with him. That way they can run as "moderate" Dems or claim that they will help President Bush. The Daschle ad is the height of hypocrisy given he is Bush's #1 opponent. I'm hoping the voters in these states see through this charade and elect the GOP candidate but given the poll numbers on some of these races it isn't entirely clear that this will happen.

Posted by: AWW at September 29, 2004 4:26 PM

Keep asking every Democrat (every day): "are you voting for John F. Kerry on Nov. 2?"

Run ads with Kerry on one side and the Democratic candidate on the other.

How about a Swift Boat with Kerry at the helm and the local Democratic candidate down at the stern, looking confused? Multiplied by 200 times, it would have quite an impact.

With the energetic GW Bush at the top, this can be the year to really drive the spike into the left. Faster, please.

Posted by: jim hamlen at September 29, 2004 4:40 PM

Cheney must be dispatched to drive AWW's point home.

He recently campaigned in Oklahoma for Coburn.

Posted by: kevin whited at September 29, 2004 4:41 PM

The Kerry nomination is a clear indication that the Democratic party has become the party of the coastal twerpy metrosexual elites and minority groups with their hands out, and that it completely ignores the fears, concerns, interests, beliefs, and lives of Americans in flyover country. A nationwide bouncing of Senate Democrats in Arkansas, South Dakota, Washington, and elsewhere might finally cause that sea change which we are waiting for. However, if the GOP were to have an overwhelming majority in the Senate we would start hearing calls from the MSM and the Ivory Tower for the elimination of the Senate or at the very least the clarion call will be sent out for ambuiance chasers to start suing to abolish or change the Senate based on 'one-man one vote' principles.

Posted by: Bart at September 30, 2004 8:05 AM
« THE USEFUL IDIOT IN TENNIS SHOES: | Main | WHAT LIBERAL BIAS? (via AWW): »